The Governance Mismatch
October 23, 2017

Mark Schwartz
Amazon Web Services

DevOps poses a unique challenge and opportunity for IT governance. Traditionally we have governed IT in terms of projects. We lump a number of requirements, fulfilling a number of business needs, together into a bundle we call a project. We then build a business case for that project, put it through some governance process, perhaps an IT steering committee or some variation on one, to decide whether to allow it to proceed and to give it a place in the company's priorities. Once the project is ongoing, the team conducting it reports on its progress against its objectives, and probably against its planned costs and schedule, and some sort of oversight mechanism is in place to review, and perhaps act on, those results. You could say that our unit of governance is the "project," or that we govern at the granularity of the project. The project is a grouping of requirements, a thing that can be planned, an initiative that begins and ends.

Of course project-oriented governance lends itself to the Waterfall model. A fixed set of requirements; a plan; a Gantt chart; a well-defined series of phases; a result at the end – this is a natural way to treat a conglomeration of requirements that has an approved business case and a committed plan.

DevOps offers us a very different manner of execution. It is flow based, with new requirements being pulled into a pipeline, worked on, and deployed quickly to users: it optimizes the lead time for getting requirements into production by automating the delivery process and by eliminating handoffs between functional silos. Each individual requirement travels its own path to production, as if it were a packet making its way across the Internet. Our unit of execution is the individual user story or task, and with very frequent deployments, DevOps can reach single piece flow.

So we find ourselves in a position where we are governing at the project level yet executing at the individual requirement level – a somewhat disturbing mismatch. The consequence is that we are forced to hold requirements in inventory, so to speak, or plan in large batches of requirements.

In order to make a business case and present an adequately sized business proposal to the steering committee, we still need to assemble a large batch of requirements. In order to report on the status of – what? – something that can have a status, I suppose, we still report on the status of projects. We forego, in other words, the full benefits of DevOps – the ability to work leanly by reducing our batch size.

But how else can we govern? What exactly can a steering committee greenlight, and how does it know how that thing is progressing?

I'd like to suggest that the answer is simple and staring us in the face. Or rather, answers, because I believe there are two approaches. The first is to govern by business objectives. We determine a business objective that will have concrete business outcomes, preferably measurable ones. Then we make a business case – formal or informal – that therobjective is worth investing a particular amount of money in. If we decide that it is, we hand the objective to an empowered team and ask them to start accomplishing it – immediately. Because we are in a DevOps world, they should be able to begin deploying functionality virtually right away. We observe the business results they achieve, determine whether they are worth continued investment, and adjust our plans.

The second alternative is to govern IT investment the way we govern the rest of our company – without a governance process. The IT organization is allocated a budget and expected to make good decisions on how to spend it to accomplish the company's objectives. It is assessed and guided like any other part of the company – let's say that the CEO evaluates the CIO's performance and gives feedback to steer IT's direction. What is evaluated is the business outcome of the IT organization's decisions. The advantage of this approach is that it allows for continual transformation, continuous investments in systems, rather than the periodic, on-again-off-again flow of investment when we organize around projects.

It's one thing to reap operational advantages from DevOps. It is a different thing to maximize the value that DevOps can deliver to the enterprise, strategically as well as tactically. For that, we need to rethink governance.

Mark Schwartz, Enterprise Strategist at Amazon Web Services (AWS), is the Author of "A Seat at the Table"

The Latest

December 11, 2018

Companies expect increased reliance on Cloud Native Applications (CNAs), however security concerns could prove to be a major obstacle, according to The State of Cloud Native Security ...

December 06, 2018

The general consensus tends to be that in the world of agile and DevOps, ITSM teams are increasingly being left behind. But the truth is, in more forward-thinking IT organizations, this isn’t the case. The fact is that ITSM is playing, or at least should play, a growing role in support of agile and DevOps initiatives. But this role still remains limited due to the fact that DevOps teams, and their management, are (more often than not) leaving them out as a tool of choice ...

December 05, 2018

The industry is revealing increasingly optimistic attitudes towards mainframes, with 93% of executives and 92% of all respondents viewing the mainframe as a strong long-term platform – the highest level in five years – according to the 2018 Mainframe Research Report from BMC ...

December 03, 2018

ActiveState surveyed developers and programmers in 92 countries to better understand their pain points and assess how businesses can better work with their organizations. The survey results establish a starting point for understanding the challenges that coders confront when working with open source runtimes ...

November 29, 2018

Organizations with established DevSecOps programs and practices greatly outperform their peers in how quickly they address flaws. The most active DevSecOps programs fix flaws more than 11.5 times faster than the typical organization, due to ongoing security checks during continuous delivery of software builds, largely the result of increased code scanning, according the latest State of Software Security (SOSS) report from CA Veracode ..

November 27, 2018

The push to make banking products digitally ready (and very quickly) has spurred the old “buy vs. build” debate in bank IT departments: Should we build our own software from scratch in-house? Or do we buy off-the-shelf solutions from third-parties? And while this dichotomy may have been a suitable mentality years ago at the start of the digital transformation revolution in banking, it simply no longer fits with the reality of today's more complex development landscape ...

November 26, 2018

With the rise of next-generation technologies, businesses have access to more data than ever, creating opportunities to develop new channels for revenue. Contributing to the increase in data is a growing reliance on the external supply chain. However, with the influx of data comes the necessity to understand the entire third-party ecosystem; its benefits and risks. Some of the most devastating breaches have been attributed to a third party ...

November 20, 2018

In today's digital economy, monitoring is a must. Your customers must be able to access your website and your apps, interact, purchase — and monitoring is one way to make sure this keeps happening. But the first question has to be: What should be monitored? With this in mind, APMdigest asked experts from across the IT industry for their opinions on what IT departments should be monitoring to ensure digital performance ...

November 19, 2018

Software developers and security teams have a well-known antagonistic relationship. Dev teams often feel plagued by the restrictive security standards placed on them by security teams that inhibit their ability to rapidly write applications, while security teams view developers as one of the biggest threats with which they have to grapple. There are three core challenges that must be addressed in order for security and DevOps to be in lockstep ...

November 15, 2018

Serverless infrastructure environments are set to become the dominant paradigm for enterprise technology deployments, according to a new report — Why the Fuss About Serverless? — released by Leading Edge Forum ...

Share this